[PGalt]

Mandates handed down by America’s robed mullahs. When the judicial accomplishes what the executive and legislative cannot by thwarting “we the people”, you have TRIANGULATION BY TOTALITARIANS.

[Sacajaweau]

Apparently, marriage and family and goodness and religion and hard work and ethics....is no longer the right thing to do.

Marriage is between a man and a woman. To even consider a homo live-in "marriage" is a farce.

[libertylover]

I deplore my government pretending that the perversion of homosexuality is normal. It’s not normal, it never has been normal, and it never will be normal, any more than breast cancer is normal.

[cuban leaf]

Before this ruling, in California homosexuals and normal people had the exact same rights: Tom marry anyone who:

Is not a sibling or close blood relative.
Is not already married.
Is of the opposite sex.

Just because they “want” to marry something else, doesn’t mean it’s marriage. Their logic is flawed on so many levels it’s laughable.

Maybe I can “marry” my brother so we can share health benefits. So what if we’re both married. Why should the state tell us who we can or can’t marry, or how many?

/s

[chainsaw]

The tenure of a few dozen, over paid, federal judges needs to be overturned.

[MrB]

Liberal judges rule based on

“this is how we want it to be”

and nothing else.

[Ransomed]

In 2000, 61% voted for marriage. In 2008, 52% voted for marriage. I wonder if prop.8 even passes today. If it is upheld by the SC, look for the homosexualists to simply keep trying to repeal it by the popular vote process.

Freegards

[LearsFool]

The point of this ruling is not to legitimize sexual disorientation - that's already been accomplished.

Much like "hate" crime legislation, this ruling takes aim at thoughts - specifically, "animosity toward the class of persons affected".

In short, if you're thinking the wrong thoughts, your vote doesn't count.